padma norbu wrote: Main point in the original thought was: "the only way I can view the incredible amount of suffering out there as "perfect" or "all good" is in the sense that at core it is pure and so can be purified.

Nope, you can't purify something that is pure. Either it is pure (and cannot be purified) or it can be purified (and thus is impure).

I can quote you several places to explain what your misunderstanding is, but I'd rather not. Just consider the phrase popular in sadhanas: "purifying obscurations."

I stand by my statement. If suffering is essentially pure there is nothing to purify, if it is capable of purification then it is not essentially pure. You do not purify obscurations (a term that only now you bring up) you remove them. Taking a veil from in front of your eyes does not purify the veil, neither does it purify your sight. Your sight is pure, the veil is a veil. The idea is not to make everything nice, this is samsara, everything is not nice nor will it be, the idea is to see things as they are and just as they are. Then you will see that everything is perfect just as it is.

Please, really, you need to read the thread from the beginning. I qualified the word "undeserved" right after I used it. I'm not going to go around in circles continually quoting my first 2-3 posts.

I am not asking you to qualify the term "undeserved" (which you did not do at the beginning of the post anyway) I am asking you to define it.

It will also pay to be a little less "agressive" towards people that are trying to help you through this discussion.

1) This is true when we are truly detached (we have become Buddha). We see that everything is karma expressing itself. 2) This is not true when we are not detached. When seeing suffering, emotions and thoughts arise. Emotions and thoughts always arise. You say something I don't like, I can become easily upset. How can you say what I experience is perfect? Of course not, I am not enlightened yet so I don't see perfection.

3) The realized mind of Buddha is perfect and the inherent qualities of the realized mind. Everything Buddha see is perfect. And Buddha see all beings as Buddhas.

NAMO AMITABHANAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)Linjii―Listen! Those of you who devote yourselves to the Dharma must not be afraid of losing your bodies and your lives―

How do we square that with the teachings that samsara is impermanent, unsatisfactory and of the nature of suffering? Isn't it the goal of every Buddhist to leave this unsatisfactory situation, and take as many sentient beings with them as they can?

How do we square that with the teachings that samsara is impermanent, unsatisfactory and of the nature of suffering? Isn't it the goal of every Buddhist to leave this unsatisfactory situation, and take as many sentient beings with them as they can?

The true condition of mind and all phenomena is primordial purity and spontaneous presence - this is known in the context of primordial wisdom or the true nature, whatever term one wishes to use.

Samsara is "seen" or known or experienced in the context of ignorance, and in that context it is accurately described in the way you've said, and it is accurate to say one needs to accumulate merit and wisdom and purify karma, etc.

So the total perfection business and the flawed samsara business are two totally different viewpoints but each is correct from its respective viewpoint. The main difference between Sutra/Tantra and Dzogchen in this regard as that the former two begin (to varying degrees) from the POV of relative truth and are aimed at trying to gain realization of absolute truth, whereas Dzogchen proper is all about getting into knowledge of absolute truth from the start. In the latter case, this means the inseparability of the two truths, not absolute truth to the exclusion of relative truth. Basically, Sutra and Tantra each split the two truths to some degree, whereas Dzogchen does not, so Dzogchen will make really lofty statements that seem to, but do not actually, contradict the so-called lower vehicles.

How do we square that with the teachings that samsara is impermanent, unsatisfactory and of the nature of suffering? Isn't it the goal of every Buddhist to leave this unsatisfactory situation, and take as many sentient beings with them as they can?

How do we square that with the teachings that samsara is impermanent, unsatisfactory and of the nature of suffering? Isn't it the goal of every Buddhist to leave this unsatisfactory situation, and take as many sentient beings with them as they can?

Oh yes,

But these teachings of dzogpa chenpo, and of the tantras too, lead to the root of what samsara really is, who sentient beings really are, and how to cut through to that truth.

The basis of phenomenon is dharmata. sentients beings are none other than the mandala.get rid of the ego, and all that is left is the basis and result of compassion.

at least, that's what i think... take it or leave it its no matter.

"Things are not what they appear to be: nor are they otherwise." --Surangama Sutra

Phenomenon, vast as space, dharmata is your base, arising and falling like ocean tide cycles, why do i cling to your illusion of unceasing changlessness?

How do we square that with the teachings that samsara is impermanent, unsatisfactory and of the nature of suffering? Isn't it the goal of every Buddhist to leave this unsatisfactory situation, and take as many sentient beings with them as they can?

Samsara arise from ignorance. Ignorance is not perfect. Remove ignorance.

Catmoon,probably the best book out there that is easy reading and will give you an excellent overview of Dzogchen is "The Crystal and the Way of Light" by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.

"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche